The Big Bailout of the Eurozone (Another crisis coming? - Seriously)

[seafoid]

If you ignore inflation the alcohol spend isn't far off total government spending from 22 years ago. I think that's incredible. 

One thing is certain. There won't be anything like the growth of the last 22 years over the next 22 years. 

[Declan]

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/bank-probe-wont-examine-euro7bn-angloilp-transfer-2395884.html

Unreal but yet more Bullshit - the reason they are not investigating is because the ex-head of Perm/TSB went public last week that he can prove the regulator was informed at all stages of why/what/how they were doing....this tacit /passive approval could be the trigger for Anglo shareholders to mount a class action against the Dept of Finance for losses due to the share collapse – if successful it could double the losses the Govt would have to stump up in relation to Anglo...and divert a serious # of legal and accountancy beaks back to their Celtic Tiger daily rates rather than the €180/day that NAMA now want to pay..

The rich get richer and the poor get hungrier – Joe Higgins was good on Prime Time last night remind Miriam that it was insane even at this point to continue to begger the country for Anglo et al..... at a price of 4 times the "missing" 15bn. Interesting contrast with France here as well http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1083484

[Zapatista]

Lads we were initially told that it would be 7 billion over the 4 years now it's 15 over 4 years and 7 in the first year. They haven't a clue and yet we merrily rumble along quoting figures that are frightening.I'm sick of saying this but the people who got us into this mess are incapable of getting us out of it yet every time I turn on the radio or TV I still have to listen to the same gobshites spouting the same nonsense be they politicians, economists or political commentators.  Though here's one that I enjoy reading

This is my point.

The only thing that hasn't changed is the 4 year term. I still haven't heard why 4 years have been decided on. With the numbers being thrown around changing from 3bn (two months ago) to 4bn (when the 4 year term was first mentioned) to 7bn and now 15bn. I think they haven't a clue. I kind of hope it might drop back to 3bn next week but that's just wishfull thinking. Even if Lenihan found a magic 12bn behind the sofa and it dropped back I would then expect it to jump to 20bn the following week.

The EU mentioned 4 years and that is accepted without explanation. Surely the EU should reconcider the 4 year term now that the figures they based that on have almost quadrupled?  Could our Government not even ask the EU to give us a little bit of hope and not demand we take 15bn in 4 years? After all it's the Irish people who will suffer from this. Why commit to a four year term anyway? The last commitment was based on a growth that didn't happen and there is no way of knowing if it will come in the next 4 years. The only thing we know is that it will be hard to grow when we take 15bn in 4 years.

[supersarsfields]

Just on a side issue regarding Quinns and the FR. It seems they have made a real c**k up of things with regards to the job cuts. Despite being told by QD management and the employee committees that the job cuts were too large they deemed they knew best and tore on with all job cuts paying out huge amounts of redundancy pay in the process.
Now they've realised the balls they've made of it. They're having to employ temp staff in to do jobs as the company can't recruit full time staff. Not only that but they have left themselves that thread bare that they are now even putting in place a bonus for staff if they stay during the administration process as they can't afford for any more staff to leave. Costs of all the bonuses and redundancies all falling on QD obviously.
And that's before you take in the costs of near 450,000 euro a month to pay the administrators.

Money well spent alright.

(Apologies for the rant!)

[Bogball XV]

This is my point.

The only thing that hasn't changed is the 4 year term. I still haven't heard why 4 years have been decided on. With the numbers being thrown around changing from 3bn (two months ago) to 4bn (when the 4 year term was first mentioned) to 7bn and now 15bn. I think they haven't a clue. I kind of hope it might drop back to 3bn next week but that's just wishfull thinking. Even if Lenihan found a magic 12bn behind the sofa and it dropped back I would then expect it to jump to 20bn the following week.

The EU mentioned 4 years and that is accepted without explanation. Surely the EU should reconcider the 4 year term now that the figures they based that on have almost quadrupled?  Could our Government not even ask the EU to give us a little bit of hope and not demand we take 15bn in 4 years? After all it's the Irish people who will suffer from this. Why commit to a four year term anyway? The last commitment was based on a growth that didn't happen and there is no way of knowing if it will come in the next 4 years. The only thing we know is that it will be hard to grow when we take 15bn in 4 years.

The problem with renegotiation of that term isn't that the EU couldn't fund us that bit longer or anything, it's the message it would send out to the rest of the eurozone. 
At the moment the EU are trying to pretend they'll be really tough with deficit rules breachers, ie above 3% of GDP, so renegotiating with Ireland would damage their credibility. 
From the inception of the euro the ecb made the mistake of allowing france and italy get away with annual double digit deficits, the others then followed suit, Ireland was almost the only one who used to hit the 3% target, now they're trying to implemement automatic fines for countries who breach the 3%, but it's touch and go as to whether that'll go through.  They have to act tough with Ireland, and we don't have a choice but to accede to their demands, because who else will help us?

[Declan]

because who else will help us?

Russia, China, Venezuela,Iran  are possibles;)

[Zapatista]

The problem with renegotiation of that term isn't that the EU couldn't fund us that bit longer or anything, it's the message it would send out to the rest of the eurozone. 
At the moment the EU are trying to pretend they'll be really tough with deficit rules breachers, ie above 3% of GDP, so renegotiating with Ireland would damage their credibility. 
From the inception of the euro the ecb made the mistake of allowing france and italy get away with annual double digit deficits, the others then followed suit, Ireland was almost the only one who used to hit the 3% target, now they're trying to implemement automatic fines for countries who breach the 3%, but it's touch and go as to whether that'll go through.  They have to act tough with Ireland, and we don't have a choice but to accede to their demands, because who else will help us?

I'm concerned about were the 4 year term came from? What figures are the 4 year plan based on? Is it a shot in the dark and a case of the EU is not for turning?

If FG and Lab didn't have the figures how could the EU have had them?

[Zapatista]

HOLY f**k!!!!!!!

DOF secretly paid off 7.9BN Anglo debt on last day of guarantee

http://www.politics.ie/economy/141313-dof-secretly-paid-off-7-9bn-anglo-debt-last-day-guarantee.html

Is this what was being discussed when Lab and FG went to meet the Government to discuss a four year plan on how to cut 7bn and walk out with a 15bn target?

Why were SF excluded from this meeting?

[whiskeysteve]

As that thread references, here is Constantin Gurdgiev's latest tweet...

We face public debt >€130K by 2015 per ea working person in IRL + our private debts/mortgages. Can't rationally expect this to be repaid!

http://twitter.com/gtcost

Well thats that then, now what?

[seafoid]

because who else will help us?

Russia, China, Venezuela,Iran  are possibles;)

All of those countries are significantly poorer than Ireland. What would be in it for them?
There is enough money stashed away by the top 20% to change the dynamic in Ireland.

[seafoid]

The problem with renegotiation of that term isn't that the EU couldn't fund us that bit longer or anything, it's the message it would send out to the rest of the eurozone. 
At the moment the EU are trying to pretend they'll be really tough with deficit rules breachers, ie above 3% of GDP, so renegotiating with Ireland would damage their credibility. 
From the inception of the euro the ecb made the mistake of allowing france and italy get away with annual double digit deficits, the others then followed suit, Ireland was almost the only one who used to hit the 3% target, now they're trying to implemement automatic fines for countries who breach the 3%, but it's touch and go as to whether that'll go through.  They have to act tough with Ireland, and we don't have a choice but to accede to their demands, because who else will help us?

I'm concerned about were the 4 year term came from? What figures are the 4 year plan based on? Is it a shot in the dark and a case of the EU is not for turning?

If FG and Lab didn't have the figures how could the EU have had them?

The EU is running the show. Lenihan agreed the 4 years in front of the finance ministers of the rest of the EU. The bond markets expect the government to get the deficit in order and if they don't they won't lend any more money.  They probably won't get the deficit down to 3% by 2014 but have to make some sort of effort. 

[whiskeysteve]

An interesting blogpost that sheds light on who (the bondholders) exactly are, that are being bailed out by the Irish taxpayer.

http://golemxiv-credo.blogspot.com/2010/10/who-are-bond-holders-we-are-bailing-out.html

The biggest fraud ever committed against this country, rail roaded by an Irish government.

Behold your children condemned to a lifetime of debt to shore up the accounts of such individuals as 'Mr Spiro Latsis, son of a Greek shipping magnate.  He also owns 30% of Hellenic Petroleum.  His personal fortune is estimated to be about $9 Billion.'

Disgusting.

[seafoid]

I thought Joe Higgins did a good job on Prime Time but he could have nailed Dick Roche when he said for every 5 we spend we get 3 by pointing out that it was FF who eviscerated the tax system with procyclical tax cuts that left the government banjaxed when crisis came calling.

[Main Street]

That information does not exist Whiskeysteve, Brian Lenihan said so on 18-05-2010

"Detailed information on bondholders of domestic credit institutions' senior and subordinated debt is not available. Credit institutions, including Anglo Irish Bank, do not have access to comprehensive information on the holders of their senior and junior, or subordinated debt, because such debt is publicly traded and dealt through clearing house systems. Issuers do not have access to the records of those systems and the issuer has no means of establishing the underlying ownership of its bonds at any given time. Unlike in the case of shares, the holders of credit institutions' senior and subordinated debt instruments are not subject to a disclosure regime."

http://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2010-05-18.985.0&s=brian+lenihan+anglo+bond+holders#g987.0.r

[Zapatista]

The EU is running the show. Lenihan agreed the 4 years in front of the finance ministers of the rest of the EU. The bond markets expect the government to get the deficit in order and if they don't they won't lend any more money.  They probably won't get the deficit down to 3% by 2014 but have to make some sort of effort.

Why did Lenihan agree to that and why hasn't that changed since the cuts have doubled? Why was 4 years the target in the first place? Someone must have applied a science to it?

Either Lenihan thinks the bond markets are stupid or they actually are stupid.